United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HON.
MICHAEL F. URBANSKI CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Randy
Morings, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, had filed a
civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
naming D. Wells as the sole defendant. Plaintiff had alleged
that Wells, who was the Health Authority at River North
Correctional Center ("RNCC"), exhibited deliberate
indifference to a serious medical need in violation of the
Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Wells had
filed a motion for summary judgment that the court granted.
However, the court also allowed Plaintiff to file an amended
complaint that states a claim upon which relief may be
granted against RNCC medical staff Nurse Walls and Lab
Technician S. Lark, pursuant to Gordon v. Leeke, 574
F.2d 1147, 1153 (4th Cir. 1978).
Plaintiff
filed the amended complaint, and presently before the court
are Lark's motion to dismiss and Walls' motions to
dismiss and for summary judgment. Although given the
opportunity to do so, Plaintiff failed to timely respond to
the motions.[1] After reviewing Defendants' motions
and the amended complaint, the court denies Lark's motion
to dismiss, grants in part and denies in part Nurse
Wall's motion to dismiss, grants Nurse Wall's motion
for summary judgment, and orders Lark to file a motion for
summary judgment.
I.
A.
The
court considers the allegations in both the original
complaint and the amended complaint.[2] The factual allegations
recited in the amended complaint are brief:
As I stated in a prior complaint, on July 8, 2015, I was
placed in Special Housing (SHU) for a disciplinary infraction
and. while housed there, I submitted several request forms
for medical treatment. Although I was told repeatedly that I
was being placed on the sick call to see the doctor, I was
never given an appointment.
Because of the delay in receiving treatment, my arm, later
determined to have been broken, was never repaired and still
gives me problems and pain.
During the review of my initial complaint, it was determined
that [Nurse Walls and S. Lark] were responsible for the
denial of treatment and this Court permitted me to file this
amended complaint naming Nurse Walls and S. Lark as proper
defendants.
(Am. Compl. 2.)
The
factual allegations recited in the original complaint are
slightly more descriptive:[3]
On July 8, 2015, I was placed in Special Housing Unit (SHU)
for a Disciplinary infraction and while in SHU I told [Nurse
Walls] that I was having a lot of "pain" in my
right arm. [Nurse Walls] told me that it was just bruised.
After about a week had passed[, ] my arm was still hurting
and the swelling had not gone down. I wrote a request form to
the nurse and asked to be seen. I got the request form back
and was informed [by Nurse Walls] that I will be on the list
to be seen. However, after about 2 weeks had passed[, ] I had
not yet seen the doctor, so I wrote another request for
medical attention on August 13, 2015 and was told [by Lark] I
have been scheduled for an appointment. On October 6, 2015, I
finally went and seen the doctor after waiting over 90 days,
was given an X-ray and the test revealed that my arm was
broken. This was determined by Dr. Stevens. On October 19,
2015, some (13) days later, I still have not receive medical
treatment for my broken arm, so I then wrote an informal
complaint attesting the denial of . . . RNCC[] Medical
Department not rendering the correct medical services for a
broken elbow/arm. Ms. D. Wells, Registered Nurse (RN)[, ]
stated in response to my informal complaint that
"y°u were seen by the nurse in October
for an injury that occurred 4-months prior; the Radiologist
Report stated old fracture-no new fracture[."] So on
October 30, 2015, I filed a grievance contesting the
Deliberate and Indifferent. .. denial of Medical Health Care
service for a Serious Medical Condition (i.e.
broken/fractured elbow).
* * *
My complaint is that I was provided inadequate medical
attention for a serious medical need. [Nurse Walls] told me
that my arm was bruised when in fact it was broken. She
provided a medical opinion without, however, any medical
test being conducted. After being informed by Dr. Stevens
that my arm was broken[, ] I was not given any treatment to
fix the break. My arm is now permanently damaged beyond
repair.
(Orig. Compl. 2-3.)
The
claims against Nurse Walls and Lark can be distinguished from
these allegations. Nurse Walls' involvement with
Plaintiffs treatment is limited to the initial examination
and diagnosis on July 8, 2015, and responding to the first
request for services form. Lark's involvement with
...